Yeah I'd also like to know. Are you comfortable sharing the city?Anonymous User wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Bump. I applied but haven't heard back. Has anybody gotten an interview there?Anonymous User wrote:Has anybody done a screener or callback with Winston & Strawn this season?
I have an interview with them coming up shortly.
2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about clerkship applications and clerkship hiring. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about clerkship applications and clerkship hiring. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Anonymous User wrote:Yeah I'd also like to know. Are you comfortable sharing the city?Anonymous User wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Bump. I applied but haven't heard back. Has anybody gotten an interview there?Anonymous User wrote:Has anybody done a screener or callback with Winston & Strawn this season?
I have an interview with them coming up shortly.
After I get an offer, I'll reveal. Sorry that this isn't helpful.
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Anyone get word about the Manatt SF clerkship reception yet? I know LA is happening next week.
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Any word on Keker hiring? I hear that they are interviewing now. Any offers or rejections?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
For clerkship hiring at a big law office that isn't the firm's headquarters, do the hiring people typically need to consult with the flagship office before making any offers?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Any sense of employment opportunities from a district clerkship in the 9th circuit, non-CA?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Has anyone heard from Kramer Levin post-interview (non-bankruptcy)?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
For those interested in non-firm jobs for clerks--got an offer at Federal Public Defender's office. Got lots of interviews based off of clerkship experience, seems like you either need that or several years of criminal experience.
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:13 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Nice! CongratsAnonymous User wrote:For those interested in non-firm jobs for clerks--got an offer at Federal Public Defender's office. Got lots of interviews based off of clerkship experience, seems like you either need that or several years of criminal experience.
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
got an offer there about a month agoAnonymous User wrote:Has anyone heard from Kramer Levin post-interview (non-bankruptcy)?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Thanks! In terms of tiers / prestige, my impression is that they are around the level of a Zuckerman or MoloLamken, but below a Bartlit Beck/Susman/Keker. Does that seem right?Anonymous User wrote:It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
I also interviewed with them because of what I heard about the culture, but I wasn't really feeling it. I think it's a good alternative to the other NYC biglaw firms for those who want somewhat more reasonable hours, more substantive experience, and don't mind the limited practice areas. But it's not so exceptional as to warrant moving to NYC just to work there.Anonymous User wrote:It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.
Even if the hours are more reasonable than other NYC firms, there's still a 2100-hour requirement to get your bonus. I know 250 of that is non-billable, but pro bono is included in that category. And I got the sense that some people easily exceeded 2100 because there was so much work, which doesn't make it much different than other places. People making sure not to bother you at unreasonable hours is great, but it doesn't really reduce the amount of work.
The practice area breadth is indeed limited, and the firm's growth has been flat pretty much forever. They also only make 1 new partner per year on average. And I think the early substantive experience is a bit overblown. None of the juniors I spoke to had done anything much more substantive than juniors at other firms.
They're not really a boutique, so I'm not sure how you'd compare those, but in terms of just prestige, I guess that sounds about right. It has a very good reputation in NYC, but the name isn't as recognizable if you ever want to leave.Anonymous User wrote:Thanks! In terms of tiers / prestige, my impression is that they are around the level of a Zuckerman or MoloLamken, but below a Bartlit Beck/Susman/Keker. Does that seem right?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
This is really helpful. Thanks!Anonymous User wrote:I also interviewed with them because of what I heard about the culture, but I wasn't really feeling it. I think it's a good alternative to the other NYC biglaw firms for those who want somewhat more reasonable hours, more substantive experience, and don't mind the limited practice areas. But it's not so exceptional as to warrant moving to NYC just to work there.Anonymous User wrote:It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.
Even if the hours are more reasonable than other NYC firms, there's still a 2100-hour requirement to get your bonus. I know 250 of that is non-billable, but pro bono is included in that category. And I got the sense that some people easily exceeded 2100 because there was so much work, which doesn't make it much different than other places. People making sure not to bother you at unreasonable hours is great, but it doesn't really reduce the amount of work.
The practice area breadth is indeed limited, and the firm's growth has been flat pretty much forever. They also only make 1 new partner per year on average. And I think the early substantive experience is a bit overblown. None of the juniors I spoke to had done anything much more substantive than juniors at other firms.
They're not really a boutique, so I'm not sure how you'd compare those, but in terms of just prestige, I guess that sounds about right. It has a very good reputation in NYC, but the name isn't as recognizable if you ever want to leave.Anonymous User wrote:Thanks! In terms of tiers / prestige, my impression is that they are around the level of a Zuckerman or MoloLamken, but below a Bartlit Beck/Susman/Keker. Does that seem right?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
FYI -- they just offered an interview today. So they are still hiring it seems.Anonymous User wrote:This is really helpful. Thanks!Anonymous User wrote:I also interviewed with them because of what I heard about the culture, but I wasn't really feeling it. I think it's a good alternative to the other NYC biglaw firms for those who want somewhat more reasonable hours, more substantive experience, and don't mind the limited practice areas. But it's not so exceptional as to warrant moving to NYC just to work there.Anonymous User wrote:It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.
Even if the hours are more reasonable than other NYC firms, there's still a 2100-hour requirement to get your bonus. I know 250 of that is non-billable, but pro bono is included in that category. And I got the sense that some people easily exceeded 2100 because there was so much work, which doesn't make it much different than other places. People making sure not to bother you at unreasonable hours is great, but it doesn't really reduce the amount of work.
The practice area breadth is indeed limited, and the firm's growth has been flat pretty much forever. They also only make 1 new partner per year on average. And I think the early substantive experience is a bit overblown. None of the juniors I spoke to had done anything much more substantive than juniors at other firms.
They're not really a boutique, so I'm not sure how you'd compare those, but in terms of just prestige, I guess that sounds about right. It has a very good reputation in NYC, but the name isn't as recognizable if you ever want to leave.Anonymous User wrote:Thanks! In terms of tiers / prestige, my impression is that they are around the level of a Zuckerman or MoloLamken, but below a Bartlit Beck/Susman/Keker. Does that seem right?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Do what you will with this tale of two friends.Anonymous User wrote:I should probably know this, but does anyone know how working with recruiters works coming out of a clerkship (in my case, a non-SDNY/D.DC district court)? And in particular, for clerks who worked in-between graduation and their clerkship?
An associate at my old firm passed along an email from a recruiter. I had been operating under the assumption that firms would not pay recruiters when hiring current clerks (because that's what a recruiter I had previously worked with said). This recruiter, though, told me that its different for clerks who worked before their clerkship (and that it depends on the firm/that particular contract). I'm assuming that the recruiter would not intentionally mislead me, given that it would be against their interest to do so.
Another clerk on my court, however, just advised me not to use recruiters because firms expect clerks to apply directly and don't want to pay the placement fee on top of the clerkship bonus (and would therefore select another candidate, all else being equal--which makes sense). I guess my hope, previously, was to leverage the recruiter's contacts and that it would be advantageous to have someone advocate on my behalf. I'm not sure if that is worth it though (maybe for opportunities that are not made public?). Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks!
My first friend clerked with me in a major west coast market. He did two one-year clerkships in the same fed district (but with different judges) back to back. He used a recruiter and was hired for the New York office of a big firm on the Cravath scale. He got credit for his two years and a $50k bonus.
Another friend is the head of recruiting (which baffles me since they graduated from a T-10 law school) at the home office of—a west coast based—big firm on the Cravath scale. They told me that their firms policy was to not hire clerks who came through recruiters because they are unwilling to pay a recruiter’s commission (well into five figures) as well as a bonus to the clerk. A few months later my friend also went out of their way to call me say, don’t use a recruiter to reapply anywhere you’ve already applied (or vice versa); the second a commission is attached to someone we had for free (sorta) they’re toxic to us and we’d rather hire someone else than pay or fight with a recruiter (I never asked what prompted this call but I image a situation like this happened in real time and they thought me and our earlier discussion).
Recently, I told the first friend what the recruiter friend told me and we tried to reconcile these facts. The conclusion we came to was that their signing bonus was reduced from $75k (remember they had two years of clerkship with no time in between) to $50k in order cover the cost of the recruiter.
I suppose the takeaway—if there is one—is that it’s possible get a big firm job out of clerkship using a recruiter, but if possible it should be avoided.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Listen to these guys, dude. You don’t somehow become less marketable after arguing on behalf of a state.Anonymous User wrote:I went to a state SG straight from my clerkship, but I know it will be only be for a short period of time for financial reasons. I love it and have had way better experience (I think) than if I had gone to a law firm. If I could afford to make a career of it at this point, I'd be tempted.Anonymous User wrote:Yes, I would turn down an offer from Gibson Dunn to work for my state's SG office.Anonymous User wrote:Looking for a little advice.
I'm a fed appellate clerk with an offer from a great firm (v-15) known for its appellate practice. Recently I received an offer from a state's SG's office. The SG promised me I'd be arguing some of the state's most important appeals in front of the state's supreme court and the fed appellate court by the end of the year. Obviously the money is significantly less, but appellate work is my thing.
I'm pretty tempted by the SG's offer. Am I crazy to turn down biglaw? Would anybody else do this?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
You don't think it might be quite difficult to land biglaw later at a firm like GDC after you turn down those firms post-law school or post-clerkship? I've heard the ideal path is 1-2 years clerking --> 2-3 years biglaw --> your ideal gov't work (perhaps that is state SG's office) for 5-10 years --> back to biglaw as a partner.Anonymous User wrote:Listen to these guys, dude. You don’t somehow become less marketable after arguing on behalf of a state.Anonymous User wrote:I went to a state SG straight from my clerkship, but I know it will be only be for a short period of time for financial reasons. I love it and have had way better experience (I think) than if I had gone to a law firm. If I could afford to make a career of it at this point, I'd be tempted.Anonymous User wrote:Yes, I would turn down an offer from Gibson Dunn to work for my state's SG office.Anonymous User wrote:Looking for a little advice.
I'm a fed appellate clerk with an offer from a great firm (v-15) known for its appellate practice. Recently I received an offer from a state's SG's office. The SG promised me I'd be arguing some of the state's most important appeals in front of the state's supreme court and the fed appellate court by the end of the year. Obviously the money is significantly less, but appellate work is my thing.
I'm pretty tempted by the SG's offer. Am I crazy to turn down biglaw? Would anybody else do this?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Bumping this, as I am also interested.Anonymous User wrote:Any word on Keker hiring? I hear that they are interviewing now. Any offers or rejections?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
I heard through the grapevine of an offerAnonymous User wrote:Bumping this, as I am also interested.Anonymous User wrote:Any word on Keker hiring? I hear that they are interviewing now. Any offers or rejections?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Anything else on Winston & Strawn? Anybody?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Good to know -- congrats to whoever that person is.Anonymous User wrote:I heard through the grapevine of an offerAnonymous User wrote:Bumping this, as I am also interested.Anonymous User wrote:Any word on Keker hiring? I hear that they are interviewing now. Any offers or rejections?
-
- Posts: 8504
- Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:01 pm
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Where is the best place to look if you're interested in working as a state SG after a COA clerkship?Anonymous User wrote:Listen to these guys, dude. You don’t somehow become less marketable after arguing on behalf of a state.Anonymous User wrote:I went to a state SG straight from my clerkship, but I know it will be only be for a short period of time for financial reasons. I love it and have had way better experience (I think) than if I had gone to a law firm. If I could afford to make a career of it at this point, I'd be tempted.Anonymous User wrote:Yes, I would turn down an offer from Gibson Dunn to work for my state's SG office.Anonymous User wrote:Looking for a little advice.
I'm a fed appellate clerk with an offer from a great firm (v-15) known for its appellate practice. Recently I received an offer from a state's SG's office. The SG promised me I'd be arguing some of the state's most important appeals in front of the state's supreme court and the fed appellate court by the end of the year. Obviously the money is significantly less, but appellate work is my thing.
I'm pretty tempted by the SG's offer. Am I crazy to turn down biglaw? Would anybody else do this?
-
- Posts: 428466
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring
Your home state, the state you went to school in, less-desirable states that need people and where you are willing to live and convince someone of thatlavarman84 wrote:Where is the best place to look if you're interested in working as a state SG after a COA clerkship?Anonymous User wrote:Listen to these guys, dude. You don’t somehow become less marketable after arguing on behalf of a state.Anonymous User wrote:I went to a state SG straight from my clerkship, but I know it will be only be for a short period of time for financial reasons. I love it and have had way better experience (I think) than if I had gone to a law firm. If I could afford to make a career of it at this point, I'd be tempted.Anonymous User wrote:Yes, I would turn down an offer from Gibson Dunn to work for my state's SG office.Anonymous User wrote:Looking for a little advice.
I'm a fed appellate clerk with an offer from a great firm (v-15) known for its appellate practice. Recently I received an offer from a state's SG's office. The SG promised me I'd be arguing some of the state's most important appeals in front of the state's supreme court and the fed appellate court by the end of the year. Obviously the money is significantly less, but appellate work is my thing.
I'm pretty tempted by the SG's offer. Am I crazy to turn down biglaw? Would anybody else do this?
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login